National Arts Club Returns Fire in Aldon James PR War

The National Arts Club sent out a press release today that sought to counter victorious statement made by former president Aldon James, and the document really reveals how contentious things have become in this case.

The club was dealt a blow this week when a Manhattan Supreme Court judge put an injunction on the club’s internal attempts to evict Mr. James from his apartments in the building. Mr. James responded to this by declaring that he and his cohorts were “taking back the club.”

Now, from the desk of the new president, Dianne Bernhard:

“O. Aldon James, currently under investigation by the New York City District Attorney’s office and the State Attorney General’s office for alleged financial misdeeds while at the helm of The National Arts Club, told the press: ‘We’re taking back the Club.’ But we’re asking: From whom is Mr. James taking it back? From the Members, to whom this Club rightfully belongs, who pay annual dues that support this public institution? Or is he taking it back from the democratically-elected Board of Governors that he himself voted for this past May?

And for what purpose is Mr. James taking back the Club? So that a quarter-century of neglect can continue until the building falls down around us, or law enforcement appoints a receiver? Or maybe he’s taking back the Club so he can continue using the Members’ dues to write questionable checks from the Club’s bank account without any oversight?

Comments

So where was the board of the NAC when Mr. James alleged (and obvious) fraud was being committed? How could they not have seen the agregious abuse of the resources of the club? I think each and every board member needs to be held accountable for the lack of action.

Some clarity please. The National Arts Club is comprised of paying members who decide each year to continue if service is delivered. The question is can the current BOD deliver a quality experience for the money, or did A James do better? Contrary to the misleading reporting of some online blogs, James did not cost the NAC money because the net assets due to waiving his pay, attracting memberships, accumulating club savings and the gift assets he brought in was considerably greater than any club related expenditures. The current BOD has to prove itself and may lose memberships, has used club savings for its battle, and is not accumulating assets or donations. The club membership has not been asked to vote at any time during this crisis on the presidency, board, or the use of their dues for prolonged infighting and legal fees. Do you want to run a club well to the satisfaction of the majority of its members or do you just want to win, to provide yourself a role? The NAC has suffered a terrible loss of reputation because of this bickering and would do well to remember that this is an age old question: ancient King Solomon and modern Ray Carver posed the question of cutting the baby in half, so let’s judge all this with a little wisdom. An election by club wide vote is in order. The rest is dangerous fluff.

Some clarity please. The National Arts Club is comprised of paying members who decide each year to continue if service is delivered. The question is can the current BOD deliver a quality experience for the money, or did A James do better? Contrary to the misleading reporting of some online blogs, James did not cost the NAC money because the net assets due to waiving his pay, attracting memberships, accumulating club savings and the gift assets he brought in was considerably greater than any club related expenditures. The current BOD has to prove itself and may lose memberships, has used club savings for its battle, and is not accumulating assets or donations. The club membership has not been asked to vote at any time during this crisis on the presidency, board, or the use of their dues for prolonged infighting and legal fees. Do you want to run a club well to the satisfaction of the majority of its members or do you just want to win, to provide yourself a role? The NAC has suffered a terrible loss of reputation because of this bickering and would do well to remember that this is an age old question: ancient King Solomon and modern Ray Carver posed the question of cutting the baby in half, so let’s judge all this with a little wisdom. An election by club wide vote is in order. The rest is dangerous fluff.